Debates on student rights, representation, and educational policy: The AMU fee hike protests

By Shahaan Alam* 

Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) has recently witnessed protests against the fee hike imposed on students. Protesters argue that while the Academic Council had initially considered a hike of around 15–20%, in some courses the increase went as high as 61–62%. Along with the rollback of the hike, students also demanded the holding of Students’ Union elections, issuance of mark sheets to those detained on academic grounds, and revocation of suspensions they view as unjust.

The demand for Students’ Union elections has been central. Supporters cite students’ democratic right to representation and legal provisions under the AMU Act of 1920 and the Lyngdoh Committee Recommendations. Critics, however, argue that past experiences with the Union have not always been positive. While the administration has announced elections in December, students point to the Lyngdoh Committee’s guideline of holding elections within 6–8 weeks of an academic session’s commencement, raising concerns about delays.

Some observers link the agitation to broader institutional dynamics. Reports suggest that internal conflicts among teachers and professors may have influenced the mobilization. In addition, younger students from hostels such as Allama Iqbal Boarding House, though not directly affected by the hikes, were drawn into the protests. Their early concerns about the affordability of education highlight how broader anxieties can become part of campus-wide mobilization, though critics suggest these concerns were sometimes channelled toward other agendas.

Tensions rose further during a Friday prayer gathering at Bab-e-Syed Gate, which became a flashpoint between students and the Uttar Pradesh Police. While students argued that police entry onto campus violated its autonomy, legal experts note that no law bars police from entering universities, though conventionally universities maintain their own security to avoid such confrontations. Commentators differ on how to interpret the role of religion in this event, with some seeing it as a continuation of identity-based politics and others stressing its symbolic importance for students’ expression.

The broader debate extends beyond AMU to higher education policy in India. The National Education Policy (NEP) has emphasized “self-sustaining models” and reduced direct state funding for universities. Institutions often pass the resulting financial burden onto students through fee increases and self-financed courses. At AMU, the introduction of 126 self-financed courses in 2024 has created disparities between regular and self-financed students. Critics argue this blurs the line between public and private education. The establishment of the Higher Education Funding Agency (HEFA) has also shifted financing models toward loans rather than direct grants, further altering the structure of higher education. Many observers argue that the fee hike at AMU reflects these larger national trends.

The Vice Chancellor has since capped the hike at 20%. While this move addressed some student concerns, others argue it does not fully resolve the issue, given that hikes were initially projected at the same rate. For some, the protests missed the opportunity to connect AMU’s struggle with the broader national debate on education policy. Historically, AMU has been a space for progressive, intellectual, and cultural contributions, associated with figures like Ismat Chughtai, Saadat Hasan Manto, Ali Sardar Jafri, and Rashid Jahan. Many believe its legacy rests on fostering debate, dissent, and social reform. Today’s debates, however, often revolve around representation, identity, and the immediate impacts of policy decisions.

The AMU fee hike protests illustrate the intersection of student representation, institutional politics, and national education policy. While students demand accountability and inclusion in decision-making, the administration navigates policy frameworks that emphasize financial autonomy. The episode reflects both the challenges facing public higher education in India and the evolving nature of student politics at AMU.

---

*AMU with an interest in politics, society, and education